IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/eee/jobhdp/v144y2018icp1-10.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Small economic losses lower total compensation for victims of emotional losses

Author

Listed:
  • Zhang, Shirley
  • Hsee, Christopher K.
  • Yu, Xueer

Abstract

This article explores an important yet understudied topic – the lay public’s opinion of fair compensation for victims of emotional losses (emotional suffering). Four experiments, covering diverse contexts, find an anomalous phenomenon: laypeople would award less compensation to someone incurring an emotional loss if the person also incurs a small economic loss than if the person incurs little or no economic loss. We explain the effect using a reasonable-anchor account: if the victim incurs little or no economic loss, people will base their assessment of total compensation on what they consider the emotional loss is worth; if the victim also incurs a non-trivial economic loss, people will anchor their assessment on the economic loss, and if the economic loss is small, the compensation will also be small. In other words, the presence of an economic loss “crowds out” the emotional loss in assessment of total compensation. This research enriches our knowledge about how laypeople make compensation decisions for emotional losses, and when they use economic losses as anchors.

Suggested Citation

  • Zhang, Shirley & Hsee, Christopher K. & Yu, Xueer, 2018. "Small economic losses lower total compensation for victims of emotional losses," Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, Elsevier, vol. 144(C), pages 1-10.
    • Handle: RePEc:eee:jobhdp:v:144:y:2018:i:c:p:1-10
    DOI: 10.1016/j.obhdp.2017.09.004
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0749597815301552
    Download Restriction: Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1016/j.obhdp.2017.09.004?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Kahneman, Daniel & Schkade, David & Sunstein, Cass R, 1998. "Shared Outrage and Erratic Awards: The Psychology of Punitive Damages," Journal of Risk and Uncertainty, Springer, vol. 16(1), pages 49-86, April.
    2. George Loewenstein, 2000. "Emotions in Economic Theory and Economic Behavior," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 90(2), pages 426-432, May.
    3. Hsee, Christopher K & Kunreuther, Howard C, 2000. "The Affection Effect in Insurance Decisions," Journal of Risk and Uncertainty, Springer, vol. 20(2), pages 141-159, March.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Carin Huber & Tobias Schlager, 2018. "Testing the risk as feeling and risk as analysis perspective for insurance: the antecedents of purchasing unit-linked life insurance products," Journal of Financial Services Marketing, Palgrave Macmillan, vol. 23(1), pages 25-37, March.
    2. Philippe P. F. M. van de Calseyde & Gideon Keren & Marcel Zeelenberg, 2013. "The insured victim effect: When and why compensating harm decreases punishment recommendations," Judgment and Decision Making, Society for Judgment and Decision Making, vol. 8(2), pages 161-173, March.
    3. Paul Slovic & Melissa L. Finucane & Ellen Peters & Donald G. MacGregor, 2004. "Risk as Analysis and Risk as Feelings: Some Thoughts about Affect, Reason, Risk, and Rationality," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 24(2), pages 311-322, April.
    4. E. Peters & H. Kunreuther & N. Sagara & P. Slovic & D. R. Schley, 2012. "Protective Measures, Personal Experience, and the Affective Psychology of Time," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 32(12), pages 2084-2097, December.
    5. Sawe, Nik, 2017. "Using neuroeconomics to understand environmental valuation," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 135(C), pages 1-9.
    6. repec:cup:judgdm:v:8:y:2013:i:2:p:161-173 is not listed on IDEAS
    7. Slovic, Paul & Finucane, Melissa L. & Peters, Ellen & MacGregor, Donald G., 2007. "The affect heuristic," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 177(3), pages 1333-1352, March.
    8. Andrew W. Lo & Dmitry V. Repin & Brett N. Steenbarger, 2005. "Fear and Greed in Financial Markets: A Clinical Study of Day-Traders," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 95(2), pages 352-359, May.
    9. Anne Corcos & Yorgos Rizopoulos, 2011. "Is prosocial behavior egocentric? The “invisible hand” of emotions," Post-Print halshs-01968213, HAL.
    10. Yun‐chien Chang & Theodore Eisenberg & Han‐Wei Ho & Martin T. Wells, 2015. "Pain and Suffering Damages in Wrongful Death Cases: An Empirical Study," Journal of Empirical Legal Studies, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 12(1), pages 128-160, March.
    11. Kenju Kamei & Louis Putterman, 2018. "Reputation Transmission Without Benefit To The Reporter: A Behavioral Underpinning Of Markets In Experimental Focus," Economic Inquiry, Western Economic Association International, vol. 56(1), pages 158-172, January.
    12. Samahita, Margaret & Holm, Håkan J., 2020. "Mining for Mood Effect in the Field," Working Papers 2020:2, Lund University, Department of Economics.
    13. Michaël Lainé, 2014. "Vers une alternative au paradigme de la rationalité ? Victoires et déboires du programme spinoziste en économie," Post-Print hal-01335618, HAL.
    14. Rojhat Avsar, 2021. "Rational Emotions: An Evolutionary Perspective," Review of Evolutionary Political Economy, Springer, vol. 2(2), pages 297-314, July.
    15. Christopher Boyce & Mikolaj Czajkowski & Nick Hanley & Charles Noussair & Michael Townsend & Steve Tucker, 2015. "The effects of emotions on preferences and choices for public goods," Discussion Papers in Environment and Development Economics 2015-08, University of St. Andrews, School of Geography and Sustainable Development.
    16. Anna Louisa Merkel & Johannes Lohse, 2019. "Is fairness intuitive? An experiment accounting for subjective utility differences under time pressure," Experimental Economics, Springer;Economic Science Association, vol. 22(1), pages 24-50, March.
    17. Gennaro Bernile & Vineet Bhagwat & Ambrus Kecskés & Phuong‐Anh Nguyen, 2021. "Are the risk attitudes of professional investors affected by personal catastrophic experiences?," Financial Management, Financial Management Association International, vol. 50(2), pages 455-486, June.
    18. Wang, Albert Y. & Young, Michael, 2023. "Mood, attention, and household trading: Evidence from terrorist attacks," Journal of Financial Markets, Elsevier, vol. 66(C).
    19. David Card & Gordon B. Dahl, 2011. "Family Violence and Football: The Effect of Unexpected Emotional Cues on Violent Behavior," The Quarterly Journal of Economics, President and Fellows of Harvard College, vol. 126(1), pages 103-143.
    20. repec:cup:judgdm:v:17:y:2022:i:5:p:988-1014 is not listed on IDEAS
    21. David Forrest, 2013. "An Economic And Social Review Of Gambling In Great Britain," Journal of Gambling Business and Economics, University of Buckingham Press, vol. 7(3), pages 1-33.
    22. Piotr Bialowolski & Dorota Weziak‐Bialowolska, 2021. "Good credit, bad credit: The differential role of the sources of debt in life satisfaction," Journal of Consumer Affairs, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 55(3), pages 967-994, September.

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:eee:jobhdp:v:144:y:2018:i:c:p:1-10. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Catherine Liu (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.elsevier.com/locate/obhdp .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.